Skip to main content

About your Search

English 20
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20
and afghanistan. and my belief that there is a smarter way to achieve our national security goals. and so, madam speaker, since that day i stood here in this spot to say over and over again that these wars are eroding our spiritual core. bankrupting us morally and fiscally. teaching our children that warfare is the new normal. i have delivered these speeches as a member of the majority and the minority when the president was a member of my party and when he was not, and today i am doing it for the 400th time. when i began the war in iraq was still quite popular. as was the president who launched it. but we spoke out anyway, refusing to bend on principle because we knew that we did not belong there. my colleagues, representative barbara lee and representative maxine waters and i, we called ourselves the triad, started the out of iraq caucus. we first -- forced the first house vote to bring our troops home. along the way i visited iraq, i tried and i learned on that trip and my opinion was confirmed against that very war, but at the same time it increased my admiration for our troops. gradually th
will spend about $150 billion a year on the wars in iraq and afghanistan. nobody believes or hopes that will happen. it has not been requested by the president. no one intends to spend that money. in fact, the president's own budget assumes that instead of the $1.7 trillion that would be over the next decade, that instead we will spend about $600 billion. that's what the president's budget says. that's what people assume. this means that senator reid's proposal to take credit for cutting an additional $1.1 trillion that's not going to be spent anyway is not going to be viewed as a credible proposal. why? because it's money that's not planning to be spent. it's a little like a family saying let's assume we're going to take a vacation we're never nefer going to take and it's going to cost $10,000, and them saying we saved $10,000 on our basketball. i wish it weren't so. i wish the $1.1 trillion was credible spending reductions we could rely on but "the washington post," "the wall street journal," many other observers have looked at this and said frankly it's not meaning a meaningful
a reason why we are in iraq and libya and afghanistan. but having said that, let's face it, it would be ridiculous to assume that i'm making an appeal for democrats when what i'm talking about is those people who are vulnerable. because of our financial center cause people to lose their homes, it wasn't just democrats, there were democrats, republicans, independents, and those that have no faith in government that woke up in the morning, they lost their jobs, they lost their home, they lost their pension funds, they lost their savings, they had to pull their kids out of school, they lost their self-esteem, some lost their homes. i don't remember anywelfare reform we are talking about people that are registered democrats. these are americans that are expected -- that expected more from their government than just saying that we will be able to address your deeds in the by and by. and the very people that are aged, god knows we are not talking about a party label. we are talking about our sick or we are talking about medicaid, we are talking about medicare, when we talk about social sec
trillion. the ryan budget contained a $1 trillion in savings winding down the wars in iraq and afghanistan. majority leader kantor acknowledged the ryan budget counted toward deficit reduction. drawing down the troops would save more than $1 trillion over 10 years. we have given them everything they asked for. $2.70 trillion, dollar for dollar, there is no revenue. [unintelligible] in my caucus, somebody had an ipad and they read it today. the rating agencies are very nervous. there was a congressional hearing today. i do not have that, but the person testifying today said the one thing the markets demand is starting tond debate this thing again in a few weeks is not a certainty. [unintelligible] excellent question. we tried our best to have a trigger with some of the stuff that president obama worked on with republicans. they worked on the trigger. they could never get there because it would be so unfair if the committee did not arrive at a positive conclusion that the trigger would be all costs. that is really unfair. we cannot get from here to there after having already put to put $7 tr
or afghanistan. at one point the c.i.a. director, leon panetta, speculated that if osama bin laden had been captured alive, he would have been sent to guantanamo. over time, it became clear that the administration did not have a policy in place that could address this circumstance. and so without a straight answer, we were left in the dark on how this administration would handle an enemy combatant captured overseas. finally after waiting 18 months, i think we have our answer. as was disclosed yesterday, he has been in military custody for months during which time he has been interrogated by various law enforcement agencies. however, now he has been read his miranda rights. this is a somalian terrorist captured overseas has now been read his miranda rights. why? why? why is a man who is a known terrorist and member of the united states -- and enemy of the united states being afforded the protections of an american citizen? and now he is in the hands of civilian authorities and will be given all the rights according to a u.s. citizen in a civilian court. it is truly astonishing that this admi
who lost his life when his offspring helicopter tragically went down in afghanistan. and now his family and friends have found a way to honor his life and sacrifice through an annual event that is now used to raise funds for a college scholarship awarded to students at eden prairie high school where randy graduated in 1985. in addition to this scholarship, his run seeks to raise awareness of the contributions of our men and women in uniform that they make every day to keep america free. the major may not live us but his memory lives on through his family and friends and his community and through the scholarships through the local high school students that share his values. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: as congress struggles to come up with this deal over government debt, we all know that all we had
every month for military operations in afghanistan alone to prop up a corrupt and incompetent karzai government. how about ending wasteful subsidies to big agriculture companies? how about asking billionaire hedge fund managers to pay the same tax rates as their secretaries? the truth is that the best way to deal with our long-term fiscal situation is to grow our economy. that means creating jobs and putting people back to work. the last election i thought was about jobs. we haven't talked about jobs at all since the new republican majority became -- came to power. that means investing in things like education and infrastructure and green technology and medical research. that's the kind of economic future the american people deserve. the boehner default plan would take us exactly in the wrong direction and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california has 5 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: mr
a loved one in afghanistan. ethan and stephanie, bowing here at arlington cemetery, lost their father on may 12 of this year. the sergeant, who was stationed at camp lejeune marine base, and another was sent with the mission to train afghan citizens to become police. the men had just sat down to dinner when a rogue trainee opened fire killing both men. in an email to his wife the day before he died, the sergeant said, and i quote, i don't trust them. i don't trust them for anything, not anything at all. this brings me to a quote from a.c. snow's recent column tiled "time to bring them home: let them live." mr. snow is a well-known correspondent in north carolina. and i quote, it seems we never run out of wars. it is as if one small country after another sends out a grave's invitation reading, we're having a war, please come. and uncle sam borrows millions to offer freedom our nation building. mr. speaker, i go back to the two little girls in this picture. how many more children will be at the grave site of a loved one? how many more have to known the pain of war? i further quote from
a group of army soldiers who were returning home from the front lines in afghanistan with a bill for almost $3,000 or $200 a piece for each soldier to check four bags on a scheduled domestic flight. americans were right low outraged by the incident -- rightly outraged by the incident which was posted in a youles tube video. the fourth bag, for which he was charged $200, contained an import carbine rifle, a .9 millimeter pistol. a spokesman for the veterans of foreign wars told the associated press the fees were the worst welcome home any soldier could receive. the shock of even being charged is enough to make service men and women simply shake their heads and wonder who or what it is they are protecting, end quote. members of the armed forces who are serving our country on the front lines should not endure personal financial hardship when they are traveling to or returning from war zones. yet, the media's reporting of the incident last month showed that major u.s. carriers were applying the same or similar policies across the board. airlines were charging soldiers to check four r
in afghanistan in a strategy of nation building that is not the best use of our national security, not the best use of our soldiers who are there to fight for our national security, but those are decisions that were made in the past. and we must pay the bill on those decisions even when i disagreed with them. and then we need to put together a plan that takes on our deficit and our debt, and that plan has to put all of the options on the table. some of my colleagues across the aisle, they said, well, we want to protect the tax spending programs where we've tucked in tax provisions for the wealthy and the well connected. we want to defend those. we don't want to touch those for the best-off americans. but we want to cut the programs for working americans. that is unacceptable. we have seen enormous increase in the disparity between the wages and welfare of our citizens in general and the best-off becoming much, much wealthier proportionately. we can't continue to say that we're going to protect the well-connected while attacking working families. that's not the america we want to build. we want
is in afghanistan, visiting the troops. the question they are asking, will they be paid if this default happens? let me put this plainly. if senator reid's plan passes as they pay down their domestic spending spree with the blood and sweat of our troops, the military will break. we have allowed ourselves to be distracted from the massive entitlement programs that are actually bankrupting the country. that stops here. the budget passed last night shrinks the government and, most importantly, holt's three years of neglect to our armed forces. thank you. now i would like to ask the gentleman from arizona -- i mean virginia, i do not know how that happened, the chairman of our readiness subcommittee. >> i think that this is an important issue. over the last several weeks we have heard a lot about the word compromise. i think that the american people realize that overlaid on that are two other words. we need to make sure that we are having common sense on whatever compromise that we have. we do not understand why it is the democratic administration constantly believes we need to compromise our national s
wars in iraq and afghanistan and participate in the nato exercise in libya. that's pretty expensive undertaking. we know that that has gone up 84%, military spending, in the last ten years, gone up 84%. we know at the same period of time that spending on mandatory programs -- that would be like social security, medicare, medicaid, agriculture payments, veterans payments. spending for those payments over the last ten years has gone up 32%. and we know that the rest of the budget, the so-called domestic discretionary spending which would include things like building highways, keeping federal prisons open, providing pell grants to college students, giving children from poor families early childhood education, putting money at the national institutes of health for madam chair research. that's one section of the budget. it comprises 12% of our budget. in the last ten years that part of our budget has gone up zero percent. no increase in spending in that section. most of our spending goes into the military, 84% increase over ten years, and mandatory programs, 32% over ten years. the bigge
discharged veteran? >> we have all of these and people coming back from iraq and afghanistan. they have made incredible sacrifices. they have taken on incredible responsibilities. you see a 23-year-old leading a platoon in dangerous circumstances, making decisions, operating complex technologies. these are folks that can perform. unfortunately, a lot of these young veterans have a higher and to limit rate than people who did not serve. -- have a higher unemployment rate than people who did not serve. we want to combine a tax credit for a company that hires veterans with a campaign to have private companies step up and do the right thing and hire more veterans. in the federal government, we have made huge emphasis on ramping up our outreach to veterans and the hiring of veterans. this is been a top priority of mine. the notion that these folks who have sacrificed for our freedom and security are coming home and not able to find a job, i think that is unacceptable. >> this next question was heavily re-tweeted and voted up by our user base. this is about the debt ceiling and tax cuts. >> the as
of the budget have been on the military side as we wage the war mechem iraq and afghanistan and participate in exercises in libya that's an expensive up undertaking. we know that has gone up 84%last military spending in the laste ten years 84%. we know the same purpose of time itat spending on mandatoryur programs wouldy, be like social security, medicare, medicaid,vea payments, spending for those u payments over the last ten years has gone up 32%. and we know that the rest of the budget, the so-called domestic diretionary discretionary spending whichde k would include things likerisons building highways, keepingrants federal prisons open, providings pell grants to college studentsr giving children from poor families early childhood education and for research, that's one section of the budgef that's 12% of the budget and in the last ten years that part of our budget has gone up 0%. no increase in spending in thatf section.g goe most of our spending goes into the military, 84% increase over ten years and mandatory programs for 32% over ten years. federal spending, the thing wef: can't seem t
on the home of someone serving in a rack or afghanistan. -- in iraq and afghanistan. host: why did they see this as an area that need to be filled? guest: the problem has been wrapped up in the general difficulties. it turns out a lot of homes have gone into -- a lot of people have gone into default of mortgages. some companies are better than others at collecting monthly payments and keeping track of paperwork. the ones have proved not to be so good at it have caught service members in the riptide. we have not gotten your payment, we over charge them. foreclosure. that sort of thing going on. this has been a politically embarrassing process of writing wrongs done against members of the military in active duty. host: gym as white as a deployed serviceman and against paying his mortgage -- jim asked why a deployed servicemen against paying his mortgage? guest: he is not exempt against paying his mortgage. is exempt against being foreclosed on. as it has been explained to me, a service member might be in the field for a week or two and have virtually no contact with the outside work force the
of iraq and afghanistan, it would take a serious look out of social security and medicare and in many cases contributing to this deficit. and it would say that those who benefit from ethanol subsidies and oil company tax breaks, the wealthiest people in this country would have to pay a little bit more to pay their fair share. something like that is what should be on the floor here this afternoon because it can pass, the president can sign it and it can solve the fiscal problems of this country or take us in the right direction. but we don't have something like that. instead we have a plan that says the following and puts it in the constitution, the guy who runs an ethanol company who gets massive public subsidies can make profits is completely left alone. he doesn't have to do anything. but for the woman who cleans his office at night is going to have to pay more to go to college, more for health care for herself, her children and her parents and more for just about anything she wants in her life. there's something wrong with that picture. sacrifice that is broadly shared is needed in
looks into counter narcotics operations in afghanistan. live coverage on c-span3 c- . >> this weekend on c-span2, literacy, economics, humor. malcolm x and the obama administration. few of the panels from our haarlem book festival. barack."er i what you try to do with your stolen moon rocks? don't try to sell them on line. sign up for book tv alerts. >> "the supreme court" is now available as a standard and enhanced e-book and tells the story to the eyes of the justices themselves. 11 original c-span interviews with current and retired justices. this new e-but includes an interview with the new supreme court justice, elena kagan. watch multimedia clips from all the justices. available now where every e- books are sold. >> revisit the civil war this weekend on american history tv on c-span 3. sunday we are live from the manassas national battlefield and the hundred 50th anniversary of the battle of bull run. lincoln and his transformation into a wartime commander in chief. what civil war programs throughout the weekend. peter carmichael looks at the social, polit
a war of necessity in afghanistan, keeping us there far longer than necessary, at an additional cost of $430 billion, unpaid for. a total cost for both wars, unpaid for, of $1.2 trillion. the republican party that will not now agree to one penny in revenue and demands only more spending cuts has fought to make tax breaks for the wealthy permanent that would cost this nation another $5 trillion. their favorite big business in wall street and a tax code that has resulted in major multibillion-dollar corporations paying no taxes -- yes, no taxes at all. in fact, a detailed government accountability office study of corporate income taxes from 1998-2005 showed that 55% of large u.s. corporations reported no, no tax liability for at least one of those eight years. yet, those same republicans will look us in the eye in defense of their defenseless position and tell us that most individuals do not pay taxes either. what they will not say is that those individuals who do not pay taxes do not pay taxes for a reason. they do not earn enough to pay income tax, and many of them are among the poor
of iraq and afghanistan. today we just voted h.r. 2650 to, in fact, establish a club of losers for these patriots who have served their country. what a shame. what a shame. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana rise? without objection. mr. scalise: mr. speaker, the house finally passed a real plan that addresses this nation's spending crisis. i think many american families know that washington has a spending problem because they have been living within their means. they have wen been trying to figure out to do what what they've got. and we passed a plan that actually would cut, cap and balance and controls spending in washington. and what's the president's plan? we have still yet to hear his plan. we hear speeches and class warfare where the president puts one part of america against the other. if he confiscated every dollar, it wouldn't address the problem. it's time to get real. if the president wants to get serious about addressing the spending problems, it's time to confront what cut, cap and balance does and tell washingt
to die. these needs last long after the last american combat ants depart iraq and afghanistan. this motion to recommit would simply protect our veterans from any potential unintended consequence resulting from this ill-conceived bill, the so-called cut, cap and balance act. the needs of america's veterans should be one of our highest priorities and this motion will ensure that our veterans are taken care of and that they receive the benefits they have earned. let's be clear, the passage of this motion to recommit will not prevent the passage of the underlying bill. this amendment is adopted, it will be incorporated into the bill and the bill will be immediately voted upon. so though we may disagree on the bill, today we have the opportunity with this motion to recommit and my amendment to speak with one voice in support of our veterans. it is up to all of us, i urge you to vote yes on this motion to recommit. but let's make sure that if this bill as its -- passes, the cut, cap and balance and any balanced budget will not result in a reduction of veterans benefits. vote yes on
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20